IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/ajagec/v98y2016i1p297-313..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Perceptions in Averting-decision Models: An Application of the Special Regressor Method to Drinking Water Choices

Author

Listed:
  • Christophe Bontemps
  • Céline Nauges

Abstract

Households' monetary valuation of water quality is a prerequisite for efficient water resource management and the valuation of water quality protection policies. Individuals are commonly questioned about their perception of risk in valuation surveys based on stated-preference methods and revealed-preference methods such as averting-behavior models. These subjective and often discrete measures are commonly used to explain individuals' actions to protect themselves against these risks. Perceptions appear as endogenous variables in traditional theoretical averting-decision models but, quite surprisingly, endogeneity of perceived risk is not always controlled for in empirical studies. In this article, we argue that perceptions have to be treated as endogenous to averting decisions in order to produce accurate and reliable measures of households' valuation of water quality improvements. We present various binary averting decision models featuring an endogenous discrete variable (such as risk perception). In particular, we compare the traditional bivariate probit model with the special regressor model, which is less well-known and relies on a different set of assumptions. In the empirical illustration using household data from Australia, Canada, and France, we study how the perceived health impacts of tap water affect a household's decision to drink water from the tap. Individuals' perceptions are found to be endogenous and significant for all models, but the estimated marginal effect is sensitive to the chosen model. Our empirical application also includes some tests of the special regressor estimator's sensitivity to underlying assumptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Christophe Bontemps & Céline Nauges, 2016. "The Impact of Perceptions in Averting-decision Models: An Application of the Special Regressor Method to Drinking Water Choices," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 98(1), pages 297-313.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:98:y:2016:i:1:p:297-313.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/ajae/aav046
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Maurin, Eric, 2002. "The impact of parental income on early schooling transitions: A re-examination using data over three generations," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 301-332, September.
    2. BONTEMPS Christophe & NAUGES Céline, 2006. "Carafe ou bouteille ? Le rôle de la qualité de l'environnement dans la décision du consommateur," LERNA Working Papers 06.07.200, LERNA, University of Toulouse.
    3. Yingying Dong & Arthur Lewbel, 2015. "A Simple Estimator for Binary Choice Models with Endogenous Regressors," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1-2), pages 82-105, February.
    4. Konishi, Yoshifumi & Adachi, Kenji, 2011. "A framework for estimating willingness-to-pay to avoid endogenous environmental risks," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 130-154, January.
    5. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    6. Lewbel, Arthur & Schennach, Susanne M., 2007. "A simple ordered data estimator for inverse density weighted expectations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 189-211, January.
    7. Bryan J. Hubbell & Jeffrey L. Jordan, 2000. "Joint Production and Averting Expenditure Measures of Willingness to Pay: Do Water Expenditures Really Measure Avoidance Costs?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 82(2), pages 427-437.
    8. John C. Whitehead, 2006. "Improving Willingness to Pay Estimates for Quality Improvements through Joint Estimation with Quality Perceptions," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(1), pages 100-111, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lanz, Bruno & Provins, Allan, 2017. "Using averting expenditures to estimate the demand for public goods: Combining objective and perceived quality," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 20-35.
    2. Anna-Maria Aksan & William F. Vásquez, 2019. "Quality Perceptions and Water Treatment Behavior at the Household Level," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 5(03), pages 1-33, July.
    3. Nauges, Céline & Wheeler, Sarah Ann, 2017. "The Complex Relationship Between Households' Climate Change Concerns and Their Water and Energy Mitigation Behaviour," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 87-94.
    4. Armand Totouom & Sostaine Romuald Fouéka Tagne & Jonas Ngouhouo Poufoun, 2018. "Determinants of the avoidance behaviour of householdsto cope with unsafe drinking water: case study of Doualaand Yaoundé in Cameroon," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 99(2), pages 121-148.
    5. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2014. "The demand for tap water quality: Survey evidence on water hardness and aesthetic quality," CIES Research Paper series 23-2014, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    6. Mogens Fosgerau & Dennis Kristensen, 2021. "Identification of a class of index models: A topological approach," The Econometrics Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 24(1), pages 121-133.
    7. Qinan Lu & Xiaodong Du & Huanguang Qiu, 2022. "Adoption patterns and productivity impacts of agricultural mechanization services," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 53(5), pages 826-845, September.
    8. Nicole Maestas & Kathleen J. Mullen & David Powell & Till von Wachter & Jeffrey B. Wenger, 2023. "The Value of Working Conditions in the United States and the Implications for the Structure of Wages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(7), pages 2007-2047, July.
    9. Whelan, Adele & McGuinness, Seamus, 2017. "Does a satisfied student make a satisfied worker?," Papers WP561, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    10. Gautam, Tej K. & Paudel, Krishna P. & Guidry, Kurt M., 2017. "Willingness To Pay For Irrigation Water In Louisiana," 2017 Annual Meeting, February 4-7, 2017, Mobile, Alabama 252821, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    11. Ahamad, Mazbahul & Gustafson, Christopher & VanWormer, Elizabeth, 2016. "Ex-post Livestock Diseases, and Pastoralists' Averting Decisions in Tanzania," 2016 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Boston, Massachusetts 235764, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Daniel, D. & Pande, Saket & Rietveld, Luuk, 2022. "Endogeneity in water use behaviour across case studies of household water treatment adoption in developing countries," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    13. Yao, Becatien H. & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Schwab, Benjamin & Amanor-Boadu, Vincent, 2022. "Mobile money, transaction costs, and market participation: evidence from Côte d’Ivoire and Tanzania," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    14. Liu, Yanan & Klaiber, Allen, 2022. "The Impact of Harmful Algal Blooms on Household Averting Expenditure," 2022 Annual Meeting, July 31-August 2, Anaheim, California 322117, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Russell Triplett & Chiradip Chatterjee & Christopher K. Johnson & Parvez Ahmed, 2019. "Perceptions of Quality and Household Water Usage: A Representative Study in Jacksonville, FL," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 25(2), pages 195-208, May.
    16. Bontemps, Christophe & Nauges, Céline, 2017. "Endogenous Variables in Binary Choice Models: Some Insights for Practitioners," TSE Working Papers 17-855, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    17. Stefano Iandolo & Anna Ferragina, 2021. "International activities and innovation: Evidence from Italy with a special regressor approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(11), pages 3300-3325, November.
    18. Wang, Pengfei, 2017. "Syndication and Foreignness: Venture Capital Investments in Emerging and Developed Markets," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 23(1), pages 1-15.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patrick Lloyd-Smith & Craig Schram & Wiktor Adamowicz & Diane Dupont, 2018. "Endogeneity of Risk Perceptions in Averting Behavior Models," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 69(2), pages 217-246, February.
    2. Bruno Lanz & Allan Provins, 2014. "The demand for tap water quality: Survey evidence on water hardness and aesthetic quality," CIES Research Paper series 23-2014, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    3. Lewbel, Arthur, 2007. "Endogenous selection or treatment model estimation," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 141(2), pages 777-806, December.
    4. Arthur Lewbel & Yingying Dong & Thomas Tao Yang, 2012. "Viewpoint: Comparing features of convenient estimators for binary choice models with endogenous regressors," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 45(3), pages 809-829, August.
    5. Arthur Lewbel & Yingying Dong & Thomas Tao Yang, 2012. "Comparing features of convenient estimators for binary choice models with endogenous regressors," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 45(3), pages 809-829, August.
    6. Bontemps, Christophe & Nauges, Céline, 2017. "Endogenous Variables in Binary Choice Models: Some Insights for Practitioners," TSE Working Papers 17-855, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    7. Yao, Becatien H. & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Schwab, Benjamin & Amanor-Boadu, Vincent, 2022. "Mobile money, transaction costs, and market participation: evidence from Côte d’Ivoire and Tanzania," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    8. Stefano Iandolo & Anna Ferragina, 2021. "International activities and innovation: Evidence from Italy with a special regressor approach," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(11), pages 3300-3325, November.
    9. Arthur Lewbel, 2012. "An Overview of the Special Regressor Method," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 810, Boston College Department of Economics.
    10. Whelan, Adele & McGuinness, Seamus, 2017. "Does a satisfied student make a satisfied worker?," Papers WP561, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    11. Yingying Dong & Arthur Lewbel, 2015. "A Simple Estimator for Binary Choice Models with Endogenous Regressors," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1-2), pages 82-105, February.
    12. Manuel Denzer, 2019. "Estimating Causal Effects in Binary Response Models with Binary Endogenous Explanatory Variables - A Comparison of Possible Estimators," Working Papers 1916, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    13. Olivier Beaumais & Anne Briand & Katrin Millock & Céline Nauges, 2010. "What are Households Willing to Pay for Better Tap Water Quality? A Cross-Country Valuation Study," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10051, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    14. Irene Mussio & Sylvia Brandt & Michael Hanemann, 2021. "Parental beliefs and willingness to pay for reduction in their child's asthma symptoms: A joint estimation approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 129-143, January.
    15. Sarbu, Miruna, 2022. "The impact of industry 4.0 on innovation performance: Insights from German manufacturing and service firms," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    16. Bruno Lanz, 2015. "Avertive expenditures, endogenous quality perception, and the demand for public goods: An instrumental variable approach," CIES Research Paper series 36-2015, Centre for International Environmental Studies, The Graduate Institute.
    17. W. Kip Viscusi & Joel Huber & Jason Bell, 2015. "The Private Rationality Of Bottled Water Drinking," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 33(3), pages 450-467, July.
    18. Simona Mateut, 2018. "Subsidies, financial constraints and firm innovative activities in emerging economies," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 131-162, January.
    19. Armand Totouom & Sostaine Romuald Fouéka Tagne & Jonas Ngouhouo Poufoun, 2018. "Determinants of the avoidance behaviour of householdsto cope with unsafe drinking water: case study of Doualaand Yaoundé in Cameroon," Review of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Studies, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 99(2), pages 121-148.
    20. William F. Vásquez & Pallab Mozumder & Dina Franceschi, 2015. "Water Quality, Household Perceptions and Averting Behavior: Evidence from Nicaragua," Water Economics and Policy (WEP), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 1(04), pages 1-21, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C14 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Semiparametric and Nonparametric Methods: General
    • C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models; Discrete Regressors; Proportions; Probabilities
    • Q51 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Valuation of Environmental Effects
    • Q53 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Air Pollution; Water Pollution; Noise; Hazardous Waste; Solid Waste; Recycling

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:ajagec:v:98:y:2016:i:1:p:297-313.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaeaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.